I Am Done Betting Exactas

[Nickle]

Sucker game, they eventually just bleed you dry. I do not like the long losing streaks you can go into with these types of bets and the rip off take the tracks get.

I am done, now a straight player only.

[the_fat_man]

Sucker game, they eventually just bleed you dry. I do not like the long losing streaks you can go into with these types of bets and the rip off take the tracks get.

I am done, now a straight player only.

LOVELY :jump::jump:

WELCOME

WELL DONE

:ThmbUp:


you should've BET THE OVERLAY --the VALUE play--- however

[twindouble]

Sucker game, they eventually just bleed you dry. I do not like the long losing streaks you can go into with these types of bets and the rip off take the tracks get.

I am done, now a straight player only.

What are you going to do if you can't make any money picking winners? That means, you won't be playing the picks or the doubles and no exacta's. If you can't hit the exacta's how are you going to pick the tris and supers?

I you were already a big winner playing to just win, why change anything?

Lets go from there. OK.

T.D.

[kitts]

Lots of people make win bets only. Me for instance. Some days I make money and some days I lose but I am content. I do not rely on my horseplaying income but I don't like losing either. Like betting Exactas.

[skate]

na na an na, something wrong here, maybe temporarily.

take a look at yourself (nv).
hey if YOU think cheating has control, you might be in the wrong business.
boy, i hate to come from this direction, it looks like a big-old-put-down, but that's what you are doing. too much of that TV garble.

simple, you are missing something and you most likely know IT.
so take a deep breath...

you can not just take a race here or there and come to conclude "Cheating".

ya ya ya , you have lots and lots of company and "yes" people cheat in EVERY profession, does that mean you stop "Banging" with you pocket mouse, i don't think so???...

[Valuist]

I don't know why anyone would lock themselves into one particular type of wager. Different situations call for different bet types. What about the kind of race where you don't have any strong likes, but you strongly dislike the two favorites? The exacta pool is definitely a good option then. What if the even money favorite looks very tough but an 18-1 shot is getting overlooked and could maybe hit the board? Again, the exacta (as well as tri) would be preferred over a win bet on an even money shot.

[Zman179]

I can say with 100% honesty that if only WPS wagers were in the game, then I would never bet on another horse race again. I tried betting solely on WPS bets, and racing became one big bore. :sleeping:

Good luck on your win bets; I hope you do very well at them. I'll stick with my trifectas. :ThmbUp:

[joeyspicks]

I can say with 100% honesty that if only WPS wagers were in the game, then I would never bet on another horse race again. I tried betting solely on WPS bets, and racing became one big bore. :sleeping:

:ThmbUp:



this quote in a nutshell contains the reason many, many, MANY continue to lose at this game.

[JustRalph]

I used to hate the exacta too. But nowadays....... I like it.

One tip........spend about 30% more on your exacta tickets i.e. a few more horses on the ticks........

I started doing this and have hit some nice ones.

[JPinMaryland]

that's basically a good tip, in my opinion. Unless you are already playing too much money on them.

[twindouble]

that's basically a good tip, in my opinion. Unless you are already playing too much money on them.

It is "basically" a good idea. I'm sure you know but I try not to dilute my exacta wagers. We gave cees and dees a hearty pat on the back for picking a $11.00 horse, that was deserving because the horse won in the manor he predicted, plus it was a 2yo race.

My point here is that cees horse was close to 5-1 on your money, there's many opportunities in the exact's to get anywhere from 5-1 to 15-1 on your investment.

When you have that real good value, that's the time to pick up who you think are the contenders with that key horse because you now looking at 25-1 and up. Not the whole field unless you have a bomb that will light up the board.

I don't scoff at those exacta's that produce 5-1 up to 15-1, I'll go for mutable tickets and not dilute if that's the way I "see" the race. Being patient waiting for those opportunities exacta's can be you bread and butter. When those good value horses come around that's the time to clock them. I don't play exact's just for the sake of playing them covering eventualities, in other words a shot in the dark. When you hit a few straight exacta's mutable times you'll like them that's for sure. To much dilution weakens your position as a gambler.

T.D.

[JPinMaryland]

My point here is that cees horse was close to 5-1 on your money, there's many opportunities in the exact's to get anywhere from 5-1 to 15-1 on your investment.

When you have that real good value, that's the time to pick up who you think are the contenders with that key horse because you now looking at 25-1 and up. Not the whole field unless you have a bomb that will light up the board.


T.D.

Couldnt you just load up 5x your money on Cees and get that 25-1 w/o having to pick another horse?

I mean if you have a key horse that is that good, why not just bet him outright??

[twindouble]

Couldnt you just load up 5x your money on Cees and get that 25-1 w/o having to pick another horse?

I mean if you have a key horse that is that good, why not just bet him outright??

Oh yes I agree, I always bet my key horses. I'll use him in any pool I think I can make a buck, you could very well get over 100-1, tri or super or picks. My point was, there's nothing wrong with 5-1 on any wager.

Don't matter how much you bet on a winner, your still going to get what the odds are after the wager and the race is official . Whereas in the gimmicks like the super anything can happen when it comes to your ROI. Same goes for the picks.

[Overlay]

One consideration for me is that the public may not be as accurate in setting exacta odds/payoffs, or would not be as likely to become oversold on a given exacta combination, as would be the case with individual horses in the win pool. Even if a horse is underlaid as a win bet, there still may be solid combinations using that horse that the public (for whatever reason) has overlooked.

[JPinMaryland]

I you're right on that. It seems true much of the time and this is where the state of my handicapping is at...how do you identify these exacta overlays? does anyone have a set of criterion?

[Overlay]

Personally, I look at combinations from the standpoint of strict conditional probability based on my calculation of their respective winning chances (according to (P1 X P2)/(1 - P1)), and also (because the horse that I judge to have the second-best probability of winning may not necessarily be the horse most likely to place), I consider the probabilities associated with their relative overall speed, which I've found effective in pointing up horses that are good candidates to hold on or get up for the place spot, even if they come up short in terms of overall winning prospects.

[betovernetcapper]

If a horse is going off at 2-1, I throw out all combinations that are less than $6. If it's 4-1 than I toss all that pay less than $10. This seems obvious but some combinations are wildly overbet. When I look at the 5 most popular exacta combinations in a given pool, the lowest is often the favorite A with the second favorite B. A lot of times the A-B and B-A are paying around the same amount and they shouldn't. The B-A should pay more, but because a lot of people box their combinations the B-A is often overbet. My somewhat rambling point is that exacta pools sometimes offer value. :)

[betovernetcapper]

As I write this the #3 is 6-5 (actually $1.3 to 1) and would pay $4.6. The 3-1 combination is $4, less than the win price of the #3. :)

[Overlay]

In Douglas Railey's book, Exacta Expose, he assessed value on exactas by comparing the exacta's projected payoff with the probability of that particular combination of choices coming in (according to data from a large sample of races), without developing a fair payoff based on calculated odds for each individual horse. For example, for an exacta putting the favorite on top with the second choice in the betting on the bottom, he would compare the projected payoff for that combination as determined by the betting on the race with the historical frequency of that combination of choices finishing 1-2 to decide if the bet offered value or not. To me, that didn't sufficently take into account the wide variability in odds ranges and winning probabilities that those betting choices could encompass.

[mudnturf]

Sucker game, they eventually just bleed you dry. I do not like the long losing streaks you can go into with these types of bets and the rip off take the tracks get.

I am done, now a straight player only.
--------------------------------------------------------------

Here are a couple of alternatives you might want to consider:

1. Create your own "Pick Two" by parlaying two horses you really like in different races. They can even be at different tracks.

2. In bigger fields, say ten horses or more, where you think the favorite is vulnerable, bet two horses to win, especially if their odds are decent. I like getting 6-1 or more. I've found this to be more profitable than a Win/Place bet on one horse.

[Robert Fischer]

Here is an Excel sheet I have for exactas(SEE BELOW). Thought this would fit in this conversation. I am a bit self taught with mathematics, so please excuse/point-out any errors;

The first attachment, keyExactas attempts to look at the probabilities and profit comparing three types of wagers. Column B and C7,8,9 represent Win wager only. A3 is the expected win %. We are assuming a fairly confident spot-play winner at 35% to start.

Next we simulate Keying that 35%winner, when we have been able to "throw out" a number of horses for the PLACE spot in the exacta. The horses we have left (including our win pick) are represented by C1. (in this case 4 horses remain). D1 is our formula to find the hit% for the exacta. We are assuming that we have correctly narrowed down our Place horses to a precision of 80% (or out of a 100 races 80 of the Place horses will be made up of our C1 horses). In D1 the formula I use .6 or 60% to represent 80% minus a 20% of the time that our Key win horse will finish second.

In this part of the sheet we are assuming an equal chance of Placing, divided among our C1 horses. C2 represents the number of horses we will bet second in the race.

Finally the third section of the sheet looks at the key exacta when we can isolate a single horse for second at a given percentage. In this case G4 @ 19%.

Row 3 represents odds - B3=winOdds(2/1), D3=exactaOdds(16/1), E3=$2exactaPayout($32)

D1,F1= exactaHit%

Row 9 shows profit

In the Second Attachment, I look at betting multiple horses for place. If we keep the wagering amount the same (E7) @ $200, we limit the number of wagers. In this case compared to 100 $2exactas, we are making 33 $6 exacta wagers. The profit remains the same regardless of the number of our C2 horses (wagered under our KeyWin horse), because we are assuming all of our C1 horses represent 80%(60%max for C2) place percentage, and each of them is equally weighted. An interesting observation is that by increasing the number of bet Place horses, in reality, we may have a few exactas higher than the example payout (E3 $32). So maybe one thing to take from all this is that if we have a Key horse for win, and 3 or 4 horses that we ca not separate for Place it actually makes sense to spend the extra money provided the Exacta Payouts increase.

One note is that C2 can be at MOST one fewer than C1, because C1 is including the Key Winner as one of the most probable place horses.

So in the example there is the Key Winner and 3 other horses which together make up 80% of the place probability...

I am working on a sheet assuming several different known place probabilities in a key exacta. Interested in a copy of the .xls? pm me, you can't upload the file type through a message.

[1st time lasix]

Sucker game, they eventually just bleed you dry. I do not like the long losing streaks you can go into with these types of bets and the rip off take the tracks get.

I am done, now a straight player only. As you have discovered.....Betting exotic combinations for overlays takes a patient dilligent personality because losing streaks can occur. You must have the proper mindset.... but i agree with others here in the forum on two points: 1} I don't believe that anyone should restrict themselves ahead of time to one pool only. Overlay value can be found in exactas, pick 3's, trifectas and daily doubles. That doesn't mean you can't specialize....nor does it mean you should spread wildly without a handicapping edge say you really like an overlooked closer that is around twelve to one to hit the board underneath...that may present an opportunity that the win pool doesn't provide. 2} I have no trouble betting a key horse to win if the odds apear generous relative to his chances. I ALWAYS play a horse at 3 to 1 or better in the win pool if I believe he will win. That is an excellent return. By the way...to be a winner in this game is very very difficult at times. We all know it. Being a straight win/place/show player doesn't necessarily make it easier!